ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. PARUL BANSAL, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3742/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 December 2025AY 2014-15Bench: Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member & Sh. Naveen Chandra (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) had relied on a High Court judgment to hold that the assessment year in question was not covered under Section 153C of the Act. The Tribunal found no contrary judgment or facts from the department.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which had allowed the assessee's appeal. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment year was covered under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, considering the facts and the High Court judgment cited.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHIBENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Yogesh Kumar US & Sh. Naveen Chandra

Hearing: 10.12.2025Pronounced: 10.12.2025

ORDER

Per Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-25[‘Ld.

CIT(A)’ for short], New Delhi dated 13.02.2025pertaining to Assessment Year2014-15.

2.

There is a delay of 5 days in filing the present appeal. For the reasons stated in the petition for condonation of delay, the delayof 5 days infiling the appeal is condoned.

3.

In the above appeal, Revenue challenged the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 13.02.2025 wherein the ld. CIT(A) by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 465 ITR 101 (Del.), allowed the appeal of the assessee.Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), Revenue preferred the captioned allowing the appeal.

4.

It is found that the ld. CIT(A) while setting aside the assessment order observed that the year under consideration is not covered within the six assessment years as per section 153C of the Act and by following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case ofOjjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. (surpa), held that the assessment year under consideration would fall beyond the ambit of six years provided u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act. Accordingly allowed the appeal of the assessee.

5.

Considering the above facts and circumstances, since there is no contrary judgment or differentiable facts brought on record by the department,we find no merits in the grounds of appeal of the Revenue. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as devoid of merits.

6.

In the result, the Appealof the Revenue is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →